Blind Freddy can see that border closures, have helped some states to protect its people, from the Coronavirus
We now have a situation where a private individual, who (if I have interpreted the story correctly), has received the help of the Federal Government, to try and make the closing of one state border, unconstitutional
I do not believe that any legal person, has the right, to override the advice of the medical profession, and force any closed borders to be reopened.
I shall get off my soapbox now, and hope that I have misinterpreted what the story has said
It appears that Mr Palmer has won round 1, as the high court will make a ruling on the hard border arrangements later this year
In summary, Mr palmer has claimed
the WA Government would "destroy the lives of hundreds of thousands of people for decades" if it continued with its hard border restrictions.
Mr Palmer also said, amongst other things
The WA Premier can't cope with the fact that my legal challenge is being assisted by the Federal Government.
He also said
WA desperately needs courage in leadership and the ability to rebuild the economy now,
Now to give a balanced view from the other side (Mr McGowan is the elected Premier of Western Australia)
Mr McGowan said the state's quarantine system was robust and the Government was doing everything it possibly could to keep COVID-19 out. Today there's new cases in Queensland new cases have come from the southern states into Queensland. Victoria has a diabolical and tragic situation on its hands," he said. We do not want that to come in here. We're doing everything we can to prevent that from coming in here. Obviously if we end up in a New South Wales or Victorian situation, that will mean big closures of industries, communities and the like. I just do not want us to end up in that position.
The Premier said the Government was confident about its position in regards to the legal challenge.
We're very hopeful we'll be successful we'll go to plan B if we lose but at the moment, we're fighting for plan A," he said. If the High Court rules the border comes down, we'll look at whatever we can do to protect people. It's just so selfish and so irresponsible of Mr Palmer, joined by the Liberal Party, trying to bring down our border.
But Mr McGowan said a decision was not expected from the High Court until September at the earliest.
He repeated his call for the Liberal Party to withdraw from the case, saying the border closure was creating jobs and allowing WA to get its economy back on track far more quickly than any other state.
It all honestly looks to me, that
Mr Palmer is being backed to the hilt, by Federal Politicians, playing politics
For whatever reason, our Federal leaders, have put the economy before our health
I have said before, and I will say it again, I hope to god, that I have interpreted this saga wrong
I think that I read a while ago, that some lawyer had said, that the words (in section 92) and intercourse among the States, Was referring to people crossing the border
Unfortunately I do not have a link
Was this what you were looking for ..... (Looks like some legal minds think that Sect 92 goes to more than just trade) :-
Movement of people and goods across state borders in Australia is guaranteed by the Constitution. Section 92 of the Constitution says
trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.
Intercourse among the States in this context, means the movement of people, goods and communications across state boundaries.
If movement of people across state borders must be absolutely free, can the states hinder or even prevent such movement during the coronavirus pandemic? The short answer is yes.
Absolutely free does not mean what it says. The High Court has accepted that there can be limits if they are reasonable and imposed for a legitimate end, such as protecting the public from a dangerous disease.
I had read this, (or something similar), before Mr Palmer started his jumping up and down to open the borders
Whenarewethere said
10:00 PM Jul 30, 2020
From the Australian Oxford Dictionary, 1600 page edition.
It says 'Communication or dealings between individuals, nations, etc'. This does not say you have to be next to the other party in the context of dealings.
Having said that one could say that some politicians are in bed with people with a vested interest, but probably not a literal bed!
So there is no hindrance of people communicating via computer, telephone, letter, fax, carrier pigeon, semaphore, smoke signals across State borders.
One could argue that we should not have GST on communications across State borders. GST is a tax collected by the Federal Government on behalf of the States, so at the end of the day it is a State tax.
So GST on communications, goods & trade across borders needs to go as it is a State tax!
Tony Bev said
11:04 PM Jul 30, 2020
Whenarewethere wrote:
One could argue that we should not have GST on communications across State borders. GST is a tax collected by the Federal Government on behalf of the States, so at the end of the day it is a State tax.
So GST on communications, goods & trade across borders needs to go as it is a State tax!
Hi Whenarewethere
Just like to say, that I actually prefer your interpretation, and not the one My Palmer is pushing
My gut feeling, is that I am watching people, going to a court, and trying to use their interpretation, (of the constitution) which suits their own agenda
This is something which (as a layman), I call playing politics, and I also believe that it is absolutely disgusting, that any person, (especially a Judge), would listen to a businessman, before they listened to a health expert
I also find it double disgusting, that the PM is assisting, a businessman, to pull down the WA borders
If the constitution had really meant, that the State borders must stay open for everything, then some states have been breaking the law, (for many years), by having quarantine on their borders, to stop the flow of certain goods
Whenarewethere said
11:32 PM Jul 30, 2020
Tony Bev wrote:
If the constitution had really meant, that the State borders must stay open for everything, then some states have been breaking the law, (for many years), by having quarantine on their borders, to stop the flow of certain goods
Excellent point your honour!
Grey Nomads will come up with more considered argument than a conga line of QCs.
Greg 1 said
01:31 AM Jul 31, 2020
Considering that on the latest straw poll here, 97% of West Australian respondents are backing McGowan to the hilt and want the border to remain closed.
The Liberal party and Palmer need to take a very good look at that number.
The next election is not too far off and if this causes a bundle of deaths in this State, the Libs could be decimated for years and Palmer be persona non grata in this State for a very long while.
Palmer is making a lot of outlandish claims in thinking he knows best for West Australians. We don't need him or his ideas here. If this is truly a democracy, then the West Australian population should decide if the border stays shut or not.
Tony Bev said
01:22 PM Jul 31, 2020
It looks like Mr Palmer, is using some dubious (not to be relied upon; suspect) tactics
He is claiming that because the WA borders were not closed due to "Hepatitis B" Which Mr Palmer claims kill thousands each year, then as Covid-19 has only killed a few in WA, the borders should be opened
The truth of the matter is (from a fact check article)
Between 1997 and 2016 there were 279 deaths of Hepatitis B, in Australia
In 2018 there were 435 deaths of Hepatitis B, in Australia
Hepatitis B is transmitted through blood and other bodily fluids It appears that it is safe to hug, kiss, share food etc with a HBV-infected person
My own interpretation, of what we know about Covid-19 so far, is that it is both airborne, and can last a while on surfaces, therefore very easily caught
My point is, that if Mr Palmer is lying about comparing Hepatitis B, with Covid-19, then what else is he lying about
It appears that there have been some people in quarantine in WA hotels, making a nuisance of themselves, kicking doors etc
Here is what the WA Premier has just said
And for those people coming back from overseas, who don't want to go into quarantine and don't want to have to pay for it, well there's a choice, they don't have to come back.
It appears that there have been some people in quarantine in WA hotels, making a nuisance of themselves, kicking doors etc
Here is what the WA Premier has just said
And for those people coming back from overseas, who don't want to go into quarantine and don't want to have to pay for it, well there's a choice, they don't have to come back.
And that is the difference between a state that has the virus contained compared to the wishy washy actions of the Premier of Victoria.
The genuine people in Vic have been sadly let down with lack of control.
Regards
Angie
Phillipn said
04:20 PM Aug 1, 2020
bentaxlebabe wrote:
Tony Bev wrote:
It appears that there have been some people in quarantine in WA hotels, making a nuisance of themselves, kicking doors etc
Here is what the WA Premier has just said
And for those people coming back from overseas, who don't want to go into quarantine and don't want to have to pay for it, well there's a choice, they don't have to come back.
And that is the difference between a state that has the virus contained compared to the wishy washy actions of the Premier of Victoria.
The genuine people in Vic have been sadly let down with lack of control.
Regards
Angie
The ADF door knocked on people who have tested positive to covid in the Melbourne area and found that more than 300 were not at home when they were supposed to be in isolation.
That brings the true meaning of the word COVID, "Citizens of Victoria ignoring Directions"
Greg 1 said
02:17 AM Aug 2, 2020
Victoria......Australia's naughty corner.
Tony Bev said
05:11 PM Aug 2, 2020
It looks like the Commonwealth (Prime Minister Morrison), has decided to let Mr Palmer go it alone, and had pulled out, of giving him further assistance
Usual disclaimer, that at over 70 years of age, I would like to see the WA border stay closed, to fully eradicate Coronavirus in WA
I have been doing some research, (err surfing the net)
My interpretation of the following story is:-
During the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1919, the Federal Government, said that they were the only ones who were allowed to close a border
The States did not think that the Federal Government, were acting quick enough
They defied the Federal Government, and closed the borders on their own accord
The Federal Government said, OK you lot squabble among yourself We'll maintain maritime quarantine in our ports, but you'll have to manage your own health arrangements within each state
Therefore in my opinion, custom and practice has already been set, and the States are allowed to Close their own borders
Greg 1 said
05:46 PM Aug 2, 2020
Scomo has suddenly had a light bulb moment that the Libs support of Palmer is not doing their reelection chances one bit of good as their popularity in WA has taken a major nose dive on the back of this border issue. Hence the back pedal
Unfortunately I think the damage has already been done in terms of the court case as they had finished presenting their witnesses supporting Palmer.
If the current polls are anything to go by, Scomo and troops are on the nose including the state Libs and Palmer is likely to go home to Queensland wearing a tar and feather coat if he steps foot over the border.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke in my opinion.
Tony Bev said
03:02 PM Aug 6, 2020
Copy and paste
Mark McGowan urges Scott Morrison to back fresh trial in WA's coronavirus border fight with Clive Palmer If I have understood the article correctly
The West Australian Premier, has asked the Prime Minister, to back him in asking for a new trial
He is also asking for a new judge, and the Commonwealth evidence to be removed
Copy and paste Currently all of the Federal Government's evidence presented to the Federal Court last week has not been struck out. This means the Prime Minister's public statement to 'withdraw' from supporting Clive Palmer's action against WA is meaningless
I am not going to go on a paper chase, but if my memory serves me correctly
The West Australian Premier, asked the Prime Minister, not to back Mr Palmer, long before the Federal court case/trial started
After the Federal Court decision was delivered, a full bench of the High Court will now consider the validity of the WA border closure
The Prime Minister/Commonwealth (for this scenario I bunch them one and the same), did withdraw from the court case/trial, but long after it had ended
Up to the time of posting this, I have read some political speak from The Prime Minister
Copy and paste
I'll be writing back to him in a way that I believe will assist the WA Government with what they're seeking to achieve
The Prime Minister has not (up to date), actually said that he would back a new trial
For those who do not like to click on links, below are three pictures from the same article It looks to me as though one person is working to achieve something, one person looks as though he has just done the dirty, and one person looks like he has a big mouth
Apologies to anyone, if I have interpreted the pictures, different than them
Tony Bev said
03:06 PM Aug 7, 2020
In the interest of giving a balanced view, and trying to decipher some political speak
Can someone with intelligence, tell me in layman speak, exactly what is the following words actually mean
We have set out important constitutional principles that I think will assist with that process and I look forward to that being supported
The words above, are in the pic below, and the story is in a live news update, link below
There was another similar thread, about the closing of the Queensland border, which (the thread) has now been closed
I respectively ask, that no wheelbarrows of political ideology, be pushed into this thread
I respectively ask, if anyone wishes the West Australian border to be opened, please start another thread
I thank the Webmaster (Cindy), for not closing this thread, (up to date), it may look like political speak, as the three main people in this scenario, are members of three different parties
I had started this thread to inform others, that a business man from Queensland, is going to court, to entice the legal profession, to force the Western Australian borders to open
Since the opening of the thread, there has been a twist to the story
The case was heard in the Federal Court, with the backing of the (Commonwealth/Prime Minister, one and the same in this story), assisting the business man
The case has passed through the Federal Court, and will soon be heard in the High Court
The Commonwealth/Prime Minister, assisted the business man, through the Federal Court, and has now withdrawn that assistance
The withdrawal of the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, now means nothing, as the evidence given by the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, still stands, and the High Court case will go ahead
The West Australia Premier, (the man who authorised the closing of the WA border)
Has asked the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, for a new trial, with a new Judge, without Commonwealth/Prime Minister assistance to the business man
Up to date, the Commonwealth/Prime Minister has (in my opinion) refused, this request
I can visualise, (and I hope to God, that I am wrong), if a business man can force open the West Australian border, then he can use the same tool, to force open, all the Australian internal borders
I have no idea, if he can then force open the external Australian border
My opinion is that I would like to see the West Australian border stay closed, for health reasons
I will point out, that while the main industries are still working in West Australia (Iron Ore/Gold etc), it is contributing to both the State and Commonwealth economy
Due to the pandemic, the price of gold has gone up, which means more profits to the companies, more employment, and more taxes to both State and Commonwealth
In Brazil the main Iron Ore producer, operations have been disrupted because of Covid-19, which, combined with heavy rains in the southeastern region, caused iron-ore producer Vales output to decline by 23.9%
I read in the not so distant past, that Australia will be taking up some of that shortfall. Once again, more profits to the companies, more employment, and more taxes to both State and Commonwealth
If we open the West Australian border, and Covid-19 gets a hold, where we will be forced try and live with it, by going stop/start, stop/start, stop/start etc, we may lose a lot of the Iron Ore/Gold income
Greg 1 said
01:47 AM Aug 9, 2020
Well said Tony.
Mike Harding said
06:50 AM Aug 9, 2020
Many on this forum love to stand on their high horse on a number of issues and pontificate about how doing a particular thing is "illegal" and such is presented as the sole reason one should not do it.
Fair enough but... you cannot have it both ways.
If the law is that borders may not be closed then governments must *always* follow the law - if they don't need to then neither do I.
The court will decide - end of story.
Tony Bev said
04:12 PM Aug 9, 2020
Mike Harding wrote:
Many on this forum love to stand on their high horse on a number of issues and pontificate about how doing a particular thing is "illegal" and such is presented as the sole reason one should not do it.
Fair enough but... you cannot have it both ways.
If the law is that borders may not be closed then governments must *always* follow the law - if they don't need to then neither do I.
The court will decide - end of story.
Hi Mike
In normal times I would have agreed with your opinion, and opening/closing of borders would not have worried me It would not even have been on my radar. I would have just carried on as normal, and respected whatever legal outcome was to be
But my opinion is, that as this is not normal times. I will therefore agree to disagree, with your opinion, that the court will decide - end of story
I believe that anything we can do, to eliminate Covid-19, must be a good thing
I believe that the closure of the West Australian border, to people, (goods are still flowing), will help to eliminate Covid-19 in Western Australia I also point out that people can still cross the border, if (like other States), they have an exemption pass, which unfortunately (I am led to believe), is hard to obtain
I very strongly disagree that anyone, whether they be business/political/legal people, have the right to force open any border, which a medical man has asked to be closed, to try and stop a pandemic
-- Edited by Tony Bev on Sunday 9th of August 2020 04:20:50 PM
Tony Bev said
06:38 PM Aug 9, 2020
A snip from a story, deep within a live news article
I now hope that someone alerts the Judge, to this new twist
If the Judge says that while there is a world wide pandemic, the States will keep the power to open/close their own borders, then I will be very happy
After the pandemic is over, they can all do what they want, with the borders
With a very sad heart, I put up another story from the same newspaper article, this is just one more reason, I think that the borders should stay closed, to help stop this Coronavirus
I will point out in case anyone did not know, that nurses, especially those trained to up to ICU standards, do not grow on trees
Hoping for a very speedy health recovery for all Covid-10 patients, especially the nurses
-- Edited by Tony Bev on Sunday 9th of August 2020 07:00:34 PM
Mike Harding said
08:05 PM Aug 9, 2020
Hello Tony
So you only want governments to ignore the law when they think there is a good reason to do so.
I think history teaches where that paths leads....
Tony Bev said
10:13 PM Aug 9, 2020
Mike Harding wrote:
Hello Tony
So you only want governments to ignore the law when they think there is a good reason to do so.
I think history teaches where that paths leads....
Hi Mike to answer your questions
So you only want governments to ignore the law when they think there is a good reason to do so.
Short Answer is:- "No"
Long answer is:- I do not believe that the closure/quarantine of any Australian State/Territory border, by those State/Territory elected leaders, is against the law
My opinion is that if it was against the law, then they have had since 1919, when the same thing happened, in the Spanish Flu epidemic, for the Federal Government to say that closing of borders is illegal, and amend the law
If this present border closure is illegal, then the Federal Government, would have sent the Army to open the borders, on the very first day of border closure
From what I can interpret of this scenario, no law has been broken by State/Territory leaders closing their borders
I believe that we have a fiasco, were a business man, accompanied on his journey by a Prime Minister, have cooked up a story that the border closures, is unconstitutional They just happen to be using the legal department, to allow the closed borders to be forced open, via some skulduggery If the closing of the border was unconstitutional, it has been like that since, 1901 (119 years), if they were half decent people, they would leave it as it is, until the pandemic has ended
I actually do not want any democratic Government to ignore the laws. They should be able to change laws, by acts of parliament, if they thought that a law was unjust.
The problem of course, is that if I thought, that my parliament member had done the wrong thing, then that person would not get my vote, at the next election Perhaps the politicians as a whole, may be a bit worried about the other 16,635,280 registered voters, not voting for them
I think history teaches where that paths leads....
I agree with you, we do not need the night of the long knives in Australia, that was a European problem, and should stay there
Gundog said
08:00 AM Aug 10, 2020
Tony, a simple act of parliament cannot change the constitution, it can only be done by referendum.
I suggest you widen your reference research, your continual quoting of ABC articles, which a majority lack balance by left wing idololigst reporters.
My understanding of the constitution, border closures are a breach of the constitution.
The tardiness of the High Court decision shows the High Court Judges are hoping the states remove their restriction before rendering a decision in September, I could be wrong but this delay suggests the closures could be illegal.
DMaxer said
08:54 AM Aug 10, 2020
I would not read anything in to it Gundog. When matters are referred to the High Court they go through a process and given the number of cases backed up, usually take some time.
There is the process of obtaining leave and then the listing process. Every case takes it turn and it is not a matter of fast tracking one over the other because it seems more important.
As the High Court also has original jurisdiction, this matter could have been commenced there initially and then referred back to the Federal Court if they so desired. There are people who have remained in custody for months, if not years, waiting the outcome of their appeal.
As for the comment made by another poster about bringing something to the attention of the judge, this would result in a mistrial. The only thing judges can consider is what is brought before the court by way of admissible evidence, not someone whispering and nudging from the sidelines.
Tony Bev said
11:06 AM Aug 10, 2020
Gundog wrote:
Tony, a simple act of parliament cannot change the constitution, it can only be done by referendum. I suggest you widen your reference research, your continual quoting of ABC articles, which a majority lack balance by left wing idololigst reporters. My understanding of the constitution, border closures are a breach of the constitution. The tardiness of the High Court decision shows the High Court Judges are hoping the states remove their restriction before rendering a decision in September, I could be wrong but this delay suggests the closures could be illegal.
Hi Gundog thanks for that information, I am not really political/constitution minded, so if it is OK with you, I believe that your info, will save me studying the Constitution At the same time, I shall try to place my opinions, alongside your own
Tony, a simple act of parliament cannot change the constitution, it can only be done by referendum.
As the above further information, has come to my attention, I will now bunch an act of Parliament with a Referendum, as one and the same, that is required to change a law or Constitution, if that law or Constitution was deemed unjust, in the eyes of a Parliament
I suggest you widen your reference research, your continual quoting of ABC articles, which a majority lack balance by left wing idololigst reporters
I am not really into any left/right/middle ideologist bun fights, Gundog. I am always happy to look at another persons point of view, as I always give and reserve the right, to agree to disagree
If you can put up some other (non left wing) free website links, concerning the West Australia border closure, I will have a look at them, as I enjoy learning new stuff
My understanding of the constitution, border closures are a breach of the constitution. The tardiness of the High Court decision shows the High Court Judges are hoping the states remove their restriction before rendering a decision in September, I could be wrong but this delay suggests the closures could be illegal.
My point of view of why it is not illegal or unconstitutional, to close the border during this present pandemic, is that the borders were closed in 1919, (101 years ago), by the Premiers, and not the Prime Minister, due to the Spanish Flu virus. If that act by the Premiers of the States/Territory in 1919, had been illegal, then any laws/Constitution, would have been changed long before today
I also believe that if this recent border closure was illegal, then the Prime Minister, would have sent the army in, on the first day, to force the border open
I have actually not come across any media articles where the Prime Minister/Members of Parliament/Judges/Media Editors/TV Personalities/Radio Announcers/ etc, have actually said that the closing of the West Australian border is illegal.
The only person I am aware of, who has said that the Western Australian border closure is illegal, is a business man from Queensland
I stand by my original opinion, which is:-
I believe that we have a fiasco, were a business man, accompanied on his journey by a Prime Minister, have cooked up a story that the border closures, is unconstitutional They just happen to be using the legal department, to allow the closed borders to be forced open, via some skulduggery
In the interest of fairness, I will always change my opinion/s, if someone can put up some facts, showing me, that I am wrong
I also restate an opinion I had placed elsewhere
Any person who forces open a State Border, which a medical man has said should stay closed to eliminate Covid-19, will never be a friend of mine
Back on my soapbox again
It appears that Mr Palmer has won round 1, as the high court will make a ruling on the hard border arrangements later this year
In summary, Mr palmer has claimed
Mr Palmer also said, amongst other things
He also said
Now to give a balanced view from the other side (Mr McGowan is the elected Premier of Western Australia)
The Premier said the Government was confident about its position in regards to the legal challenge.
But Mr McGowan said a decision was not expected from the High Court until September at the earliest.
It all honestly looks to me, that
I have said before, and I will say it again, I hope to god, that I have interpreted this saga wrong
Link below to the story update
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-30/clive-palmer-claims-coronavirus-border-policy-destroying-lives/12506720
Cupie thank you for digging that out for me
I had read this, (or something similar), before Mr Palmer started his jumping up and down to open the borders
From the Australian Oxford Dictionary, 1600 page edition.
It says 'Communication or dealings between individuals, nations, etc'. This does not say you have to be next to the other party in the context of dealings.
Having said that one could say that some politicians are in bed with people with a vested interest, but probably not a literal bed!
So there is no hindrance of people communicating via computer, telephone, letter, fax, carrier pigeon, semaphore, smoke signals across State borders.
One could argue that we should not have GST on communications across State borders. GST is a tax collected by the Federal Government on behalf of the States, so at the end of the day it is a State tax.
So GST on communications, goods & trade across borders needs to go as it is a State tax!
Hi Whenarewethere
Just like to say, that I actually prefer your interpretation, and not the one My Palmer is pushing
My gut feeling, is that I am watching people, going to a court, and trying to use their interpretation, (of the constitution) which suits their own agenda
This is something which (as a layman), I call playing politics, and I also believe that it is absolutely disgusting, that any person, (especially a Judge), would listen to a businessman, before they listened to a health expert
I also find it double disgusting, that the PM is assisting, a businessman, to pull down the WA borders
If the constitution had really meant, that the State borders must stay open for everything, then some states have been breaking the law, (for many years), by having quarantine on their borders, to stop the flow of certain goods
Excellent point your honour!
Grey Nomads will come up with more considered argument than a conga line of QCs.
It looks like Mr Palmer, is using some dubious (not to be relied upon; suspect) tactics
He is claiming that because the WA borders were not closed due to "Hepatitis B"
Which Mr Palmer claims kill thousands each year, then as Covid-19 has only killed a few in WA, the borders should be opened
The truth of the matter is (from a fact check article)
It appears that it is safe to hug, kiss, share food etc with a HBV-infected person
My point is, that if Mr Palmer is lying about comparing Hepatitis B, with Covid-19, then what else is he lying about
Link to the story below
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-31/coronacheck-clive-palmer-covid-19-comparison-hepatitis-b/12506842
Hi Ian
I assume that you kept your WA rego/licence etc, and have a G2G pass approved, to come home from NT to WA
Not sure if you will have to isolate, but if you have never been there, then Kununurra (40 odd Ks from the border), is quite a nice town
I am led to believe that if you wish to go home to Perth to isolate, then it has to be more or less straight through, without any sightseeing
If I can help at all, then let me know
Have a safe and happy road trip
Below is a link to a video, of 1 minute 38 seconds
It is the West Australia Premier, partly in answer to Mr Palmer, on the reason he is keeping a hard border
I believe this is in the interest of travelling, but I will not put the video up, in case people think that it is political
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-31/premier-mark-mcgowan-says-clive-palmer-is-the-enemy-of-wa/12512678?nw=0
It appears that there have been some people in quarantine in WA hotels, making a nuisance of themselves, kicking doors etc
Here is what the WA Premier has just said
Link to story in a live news article
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-31/coronavirus-australia-live-news-covid-19-victoria-queensland-nsw/12510468
And that is the difference between a state that has the virus contained compared to the wishy washy actions of the Premier of Victoria.
The genuine people in Vic have been sadly let down with lack of control.
Regards
Angie
The ADF door knocked on people who have tested positive to covid in the Melbourne area and found that more than 300 were not at home when they were supposed to be in isolation.
That brings the true meaning of the word COVID, "Citizens of Victoria ignoring Directions"
It looks like the Commonwealth (Prime Minister Morrison), has decided to let Mr Palmer go it alone, and had pulled out, of giving him further assistance
The WA Premier, has said that it may be too late.
Link to story below
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-02/government-removes-support-for-clive-palmers-push-to-open-border/12515948
Usual disclaimer, that at over 70 years of age, I would like to see the WA border stay closed, to fully eradicate Coronavirus in WA
I have been doing some research, (err surfing the net)
My interpretation of the following story is:-
During the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1919, the Federal Government, said that they were the only ones who were allowed to close a border
The States did not think that the Federal Government, were acting quick enough
They defied the Federal Government, and closed the borders on their own accord
The Federal Government said, OK you lot squabble among yourself
We'll maintain maritime quarantine in our ports, but you'll have to manage your own health arrangements within each state
Link to story below
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-24/coronavirus-border-closures-reminiscent-of-spanish-flu-shutdown/12085478
Therefore in my opinion, custom and practice has already been set, and the States are allowed to Close their own borders
Copy and paste
If I have understood the article correctly
The West Australian Premier, has asked the Prime Minister, to back him in asking for a new trial
He is also asking for a new judge, and the Commonwealth evidence to be removed
Copy and paste
I am not going to go on a paper chase, but if my memory serves me correctly
Up to the time of posting this, I have read some political speak from The Prime Minister
Copy and paste
The Prime Minister has not (up to date), actually said that he would back a new trial
Link to story below
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-06/wa-premier-urges-pm-to-back-new-trial-in-clive-palmer-border-row/12529014
For those who do not like to click on links, below are three pictures from the same article
It looks to me as though one person is working to achieve something, one person looks as though he has just done the dirty, and one person looks like he has a big mouth
Apologies to anyone, if I have interpreted the pictures, different than them
In the interest of giving a balanced view, and trying to decipher some political speak
Can someone with intelligence, tell me in layman speak, exactly what is the following words actually mean
The words above, are in the pic below, and the story is in a live news update, link below
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-07/coronavirus-australia-live-national-cabinet-queensland-border/12532064
I respectively ask, that no wheelbarrows of political ideology, be pushed into this thread
I respectively ask, if anyone wishes the West Australian border to be opened, please start another thread
I thank the Webmaster (Cindy), for not closing this thread, (up to date), it may look like political speak, as the three main people in this scenario, are members of three different parties
I had started this thread to inform others, that a business man from Queensland, is going to court, to entice the legal profession, to force the Western Australian borders to open
Since the opening of the thread, there has been a twist to the story
The case was heard in the Federal Court, with the backing of the (Commonwealth/Prime Minister, one and the same in this story), assisting the business man
The case has passed through the Federal Court, and will soon be heard in the High Court
The Commonwealth/Prime Minister, assisted the business man, through the Federal Court, and has now withdrawn that assistance
The withdrawal of the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, now means nothing, as the evidence given by the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, still stands, and the High Court case will go ahead
The West Australia Premier, (the man who authorised the closing of the WA border)
Has asked the Commonwealth/Prime Minister, for a new trial, with a new Judge, without Commonwealth/Prime Minister assistance to the business man
Up to date, the Commonwealth/Prime Minister has (in my opinion) refused, this request
I can visualise, (and I hope to God, that I am wrong), if a business man can force open the West Australian border, then he can use the same tool, to force open, all the Australian internal borders
I have no idea, if he can then force open the external Australian border
My opinion is that I would like to see the West Australian border stay closed, for health reasons
I will point out, that while the main industries are still working in West Australia (Iron Ore/Gold etc), it is contributing to both the State and Commonwealth economy
Due to the pandemic, the price of gold has gone up, which means more profits to the companies, more employment, and more taxes to both State and Commonwealth
In Brazil the main Iron Ore producer, operations have been disrupted because of Covid-19, which, combined with heavy rains in the southeastern region, caused iron-ore producer Vales output to decline by 23.9%
I read in the not so distant past, that Australia will be taking up some of that shortfall. Once again, more profits to the companies, more employment, and more taxes to both State and Commonwealth
If we open the West Australian border, and Covid-19 gets a hold, where we will be forced try and live with it, by going stop/start, stop/start, stop/start etc, we may lose a lot of the Iron Ore/Gold income
Many on this forum love to stand on their high horse on a number of issues and pontificate about how doing a particular thing is "illegal" and such is presented as the sole reason one should not do it.
Fair enough but... you cannot have it both ways.
If the law is that borders may not be closed then governments must *always* follow the law - if they don't need to then neither do I.
The court will decide - end of story.
Hi Mike
In normal times I would have agreed with your opinion, and opening/closing of borders would not have worried me
It would not even have been on my radar. I would have just carried on as normal, and respected whatever legal outcome was to be
But my opinion is, that as this is not normal times. I will therefore agree to disagree, with your opinion, that
I believe that anything we can do, to eliminate Covid-19, must be a good thing
I believe that the closure of the West Australian border, to people, (goods are still flowing), will help to eliminate Covid-19 in Western Australia
I also point out that people can still cross the border, if (like other States), they have an exemption pass, which unfortunately (I am led to believe), is hard to obtain
I very strongly disagree that anyone, whether they be business/political/legal people, have the right to force open any border, which a medical man has asked to be closed, to try and stop a pandemic
-- Edited by Tony Bev on Sunday 9th of August 2020 04:20:50 PM
A snip from a story, deep within a live news article
I now hope that someone alerts the Judge, to this new twist
If the Judge says that while there is a world wide pandemic, the States will keep the power to open/close their own borders, then I will be very happy
After the pandemic is over, they can all do what they want, with the borders
Link below to the live news article
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-09/coronavirus-australia-live-blog-bunnings-hospital-worker-covid19/12538264
Edit to say
With a very sad heart, I put up another story from the same newspaper article, this is just one more reason, I think that the borders should stay closed, to help stop this Coronavirus
I will point out in case anyone did not know, that nurses, especially those trained to up to ICU standards, do not grow on trees
Hoping for a very speedy health recovery for all Covid-10 patients, especially the nurses
-- Edited by Tony Bev on Sunday 9th of August 2020 07:00:34 PM
Hello Tony
So you only want governments to ignore the law when they think there is a good reason to do so.
I think history teaches where that paths leads....
Hi Mike to answer your questions
Short Answer is:- "No"
Long answer is:-
I do not believe that the closure/quarantine of any Australian State/Territory border, by those State/Territory elected leaders, is against the law
My opinion is that if it was against the law, then they have had since 1919, when the same thing happened, in the Spanish Flu epidemic, for the Federal Government to say that closing of borders is illegal, and amend the law
If this present border closure is illegal, then the Federal Government, would have sent the Army to open the borders, on the very first day of border closure
From what I can interpret of this scenario, no law has been broken by State/Territory leaders closing their borders
I believe that we have a fiasco, were a business man, accompanied on his journey by a Prime Minister, have cooked up a story that the border closures, is unconstitutional
They just happen to be using the legal department, to allow the closed borders to be forced open, via some skulduggery
If the closing of the border was unconstitutional, it has been like that since, 1901 (119 years), if they were half decent people, they would leave it as it is, until the pandemic has ended
I actually do not want any democratic Government to ignore the laws. They should be able to change laws, by acts of parliament, if they thought that a law was unjust.
The problem of course, is that if I thought, that my parliament member had done the wrong thing, then that person would not get my vote, at the next election
Perhaps the politicians as a whole, may be a bit worried about the other 16,635,280 registered voters, not voting for them
I agree with you, we do not need the night of the long knives in Australia, that was a European problem, and should stay there
I would not read anything in to it Gundog. When matters are referred to the High Court they go through a process and given the number of cases backed up, usually take some time.
There is the process of obtaining leave and then the listing process. Every case takes it turn and it is not a matter of fast tracking one over the other because it seems more important.
As the High Court also has original jurisdiction, this matter could have been commenced there initially and then referred back to the Federal Court if they so desired. There are people who have remained in custody for months, if not years, waiting the outcome of their appeal.
As for the comment made by another poster about bringing something to the attention of the judge, this would result in a mistrial. The only thing judges can consider is what is brought before the court by way of admissible evidence, not someone whispering and nudging from the sidelines.
Hi Gundog thanks for that information, I am not really political/constitution minded, so if it is OK with you, I believe that your info, will save me studying the Constitution
At the same time, I shall try to place my opinions, alongside your own
As the above further information, has come to my attention, I will now bunch an act of Parliament with a Referendum, as one and the same, that is required to change a law or Constitution, if that law or Constitution was deemed unjust, in the eyes of a Parliament
I am not really into any left/right/middle ideologist bun fights, Gundog. I am always happy to look at another persons point of view, as I always give and reserve the right, to agree to disagree
If you can put up some other (non left wing) free website links, concerning the West Australia border closure, I will have a look at them, as I enjoy learning new stuff
My point of view of why it is not illegal or unconstitutional, to close the border during this present pandemic, is that the borders were closed in 1919, (101 years ago), by the Premiers, and not the Prime Minister, due to the Spanish Flu virus. If that act by the Premiers of the States/Territory in 1919, had been illegal, then any laws/Constitution, would have been changed long before today
I also believe that if this recent border closure was illegal, then the Prime Minister, would have sent the army in, on the first day, to force the border open
I have actually not come across any media articles where the Prime Minister/Members of Parliament/Judges/Media Editors/TV Personalities/Radio Announcers/ etc, have actually said that the closing of the West Australian border is illegal.
The only person I am aware of, who has said that the Western Australian border closure is illegal, is a business man from Queensland
I stand by my original opinion, which is:-
In the interest of fairness, I will always change my opinion/s, if someone can put up some facts, showing me, that I am wrong
I also restate an opinion I had placed elsewhere
Any person who forces open a State Border, which a medical man has said should stay closed to eliminate Covid-19, will never be a friend of mine